Make America Reconsider! – Share Pat’s Columns …
Ukraine’s independence is not crucial to the United States. While a desirable objective, it is not worth our combating a war with Russia to maintain … Undoubtedly, had we provided Putin guarantees that NATO was closed to Kyiv, we might have avoided what has actually occurred, because that was the very first and most insistent of Putin’s needs.
When Hungarian rebels developed in 1956 to overthrow the Communist routine enforced by Joseph Stalin, President Dwight Eisenhower refused to send out U.S. forces to assist the Hungarians.
Ike would not take America to war with Russia over a little nation in Central Europe.
While the Hungarians were heroic and inspirational, Hungary was neither a member of NATO nor an important U.S. interest. Moreover, it was on the Soviet side of the Yalta line dividing Europe, and agreed to by Franklin D. Roosevelt, Joseph Stalin and Winston Churchill at Yalta in 1945.
For comparable factors today, President Joe Biden has actually refused to send U.S. troops, ships or airplanes to attack Russian forces getting into Ukraine.
Though a nation of 44 million and almost as large as Texas, Ukraine is neither an essential U.S. interest nor a member of NATO.
However, were Russian President Vladimir Putin to attack Estonia, whose population is 3% of Ukraine’s, America would be obligated to go to war with Russia.
Does this disparity make strategic sense?
Should not America have the same liberty of action to choose whether to fight for Estonia as we do to choose whether to eliminate for Ukraine? After all, Ukraine is far bigger and more populated and tactical.
In 1948, President Harry Truman declined to utilize force to break Stalin’s Berlin Blockade. In 1956, Eisenhower declined to step in to save Hungary. In 1961, President John F. Kennedy refused to utilize force to stop the building of the Berlin Wall.
In 1968, President Lyndon Johnson refused to step in when the USSR attacked Czechoslovakia to crush the pro-democracy “Prague Spring.”
Have something to say about this column?Visit Gab– The social network that champs totally free speech– Comment without Censorship!Or visit Pat’s FaceBook page and post your remarks … Yet, today, America’s leaders do not have the very same liberty not
to function as did Truman, Eisenhower , Kennedy and Johnson. We are bound to act. Why? Because, since the end of the Cold War, we have actually broadened the subscription of NATO, and there are now 28 nations of Europe we are
obligated to defend if they are assaulted. Ukraine is not one of them, but five of them that border Russia or Ukraine– Romania, Slovakia, Poland, Latvia and Estonia– are presently
offering Stinger or Javelin missiles to Ukraine to destroy Russian tanks, down Russian aircraft, and eliminate Russian soldiers in Ukraine. If Putin struck back against any of these countries for these arms transfers that are eliminating Russian soldiers, the U.S. would be obligated, under Article 5 of
NATO, to combat Russia on behalf of these NATO countries. Article 5 instantly conscripts the United States into a war with Russia, if Moscow retaliates versus a NATO country offering weapons to eliminate Russian soldiers.
Why have we willingly tied our own hands in this way? During 40 years of Cold War, America remained protected while East Germany, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Bulgaria, Romania
, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia were all under Moscow’s control
. These nations are all complimentary today as a result of the West’s success in the Cold War. But why do all these nations have war guarantees from the United States when none, as the Cold War demonstrated, is a vital
interest of the USA? Why, after the Cold War ended in 1991, did we consent to fight a war with Russia, consisting of a nuclear war, on their behalf when 40 years of Cold War demonstrated they were not vital to our security? Today, by our refusal to step in militarily in Ukraine, to slow or stop this Russian intrusion, we are sending a message to the world. That message? Ukraine’s self-reliance is not essential to the United States. While a preferable goal, it is unworthy our battling a war with Russia to protect. View the Latest Videos on Our Buchanan-Trump YouTube Playlist! Moreover, the self-reliance of Ukraine is not worth
the risk of using U.S.
aircrafts to develop a no-fly zone for Russian aircrafts in the skies over Ukraine. Certainly, had we provided Putin assurances that NATO was closed to Kyiv, we might have avoided what has actually happened
, since that was the very first and most insistent
of Putin’s needs. The brave rhetoric we are hearing from our political and media leaders aside, the real message sent to Ukraine by our own and NATO’s actions and inactiveness is this: We
will send you weapons, however we are not sending our troops, and we are not going to combat your war for you, or beside you, unless and up until we decide that it is in our vital interest to do so. Luckily, we had not brought Ukraine into NATO, nor offered Kyiv a war assurance that obligated us to risk everything for a nation considered not essential to us. Those who prevented
the U.S. from understanding former President George W. Bush’s ambition to bring Ukraine and Georgia into NATO might have conserved us from a war with Russia in which both of us might have suffered badly. Whether we fight for
a country that was previously part of the Soviet bloc must be a matter for decision by the Americans of that day and time– not mandated, not dictated by our signature on a 73-year-old treaty, created for another era and another world. Do You Appreciate Reading Our Emails and Website? Let us understand how we are doing– Send us a Thank You Via Paypal! Image Source: Unsplash … Note: We are an Amazon Associate. Your purchases on Amazon.com via any of our links will help support Buchanan.org– at no extra cost to you! Make America Smart Again-Share Pat’s Columns!Like this: Like Loading … Related
Posts Make America Think Again!-Share Pat’s Columns …